Opinion: Stewarding the national interest

Arbitrations are by their nature confidential, so we don’t know the full story about the Government of Malta / Steward Health Care arbitration.

You know the one I mean. The one where Robert Abela is taking the credit for going above and beyond the call of duty to stop Steward from getting their sticky fingers (those not attached to wrists that are handcuffed, anyway) on more of our loot or getting back the loot already shovelled over to them, or whatever it is that he’s trying to do.

Arbitrations are either contractual or consensual. Hence, the government accepted arbitration either because it was bound to do so by its contract with Steward or because it agreed to submit to arbitration when relations soured.

So far, so normal.

I don’t know when the arbitration started. Whether it was before the dodges perpetrated by Steward and/or its willing collaborators came into the public domain is not entirely clear to me, and it may well be that I am to blame for my lack of knowledge on that specific point.

It also seems to be the case that it was Steward who insisted on the arbitration — meaning the government was forced into the private forum at Steward’s instance, not because the government chose to go there.

The question of who started the process and whether or not it is particularly relevant is an academic point that may be less than pivotal.

Be that as it may be, as one of my less loved professors used to say with dripping sarcasm during our oral tortures, it is my moral conviction that it has become more than somewhat clear that Steward and its whores have played fast and loose with the law and the principles of good governance.

Such principles include refraining from corrupting officials and decision makers — not defrauding everyone every which way from Sunday — and generally behaving in such a manner so as not to attract the contempt and loathing of right thinking people.

See what I did there, incidentally? No one can sue me for having a moral conviction, as Dr Alfred Sant so adroitly demonstrated back in the day.

This behaviour on the part of Steward — into which phrase should be inserted the time-honoured qualifier “alleged” just in front of “behaviour” — allows the government of this sovereign state to give consideration to the idea of letting the arbitration panel know that it does not think it should be in the same room with these (alleged) miscreants, that the arbitration should be shelved permanently, and that the matter should be sent to the courts.

Oh, wait, the courts have already found that the deal was fatally impaired, that it was worth less than the paper on which it was written, and that it can safely be branded as fraudulent, if not in so many words, then at least with sufficient clarity for anyone with an IQ that exceeds that of a particularly stupid stone to grasp the idea.

So, may I be permitted to ask, without even the slightest misapprehension that anyone will answer, just WTF is Robert Abela doing preening about this arbitration? WTF is he not going after Steward with all guns blazing and hang the consequences?

Seriously, why?